CUNY UNIVERSITY Exhibits Portraits of Iraqis Killed by American Troops

This is a sickness, a sickness of the mind. Back in the day I used to squint at the gore the daily newspaper might be offering up. These days I squint  sideways as one might at a disgusting wound,when perusing the latest act the left is perpetrating against humanity in the guise of doublespeak.

Today it is was academia (again), no  I know what you're thinking Columbia.....uh uh. CUNY. Taxpayer funded CUNY. Jacob Gershman, New York Sun

Behind glass-paneled cabinets set along a hallway inside CUNY's Graduate Center in Manhattan, the faces of young and old Iraqi citizens killed by American troops peer out.

Mr. Batchen, whose course is called "The Photograph in the World," said the exhibition deliberately included only portraits of Iraqis killed by Americans. "We're in the United States," he said. "Our military is undertaking these activities." But he said the exhibition was not "explicitly an anti-war project."

Students in his course designed the exhibit to coincide with a symposium that the Graduate Center is hosting this week called "Picturing Atrocity: Photography in Crisis," organized by several universities and museums.

The symposium intends to "explore the increasingly urgent questions provoked by photographs of atrocity in contemporary visual culture," according to its Web site. Along the same hallway that contains "Portraits of Grief" is another project created by the class, which features enlarged questionnaires that people filled out about their reactions to the Abu Ghraib images of tortured Iraqi prisoners.

"The project is about our complicity," said the class's professor, Geoffrey Batchen, a professor in art history at the Graduate Center, CUNY's doctoral granting institution. This is what is teaching your children, ladies and gentlemen. This..........scourge - Atlas
Why do I have to fund this sedition?

None of the vignettes contain information about the context of the specific American military actions and none mentions the existence of Iraqi and foreign insurgents. The students in Mr. Batchen's class wrote the biographical snippets using information they culled from anti-war Web sites, iraqvictims.com, iraqbodycount.org, and the Web site of the Guardian newspaper.

In other words, no fact based sites - pure propaganda, Goebbels-inspired sites. Imagine this photography exhibit is playing against the backdrop of gut wrenching witness testimony of the most heinous atrocities of Saddam Hussein's regime at his ongoing trial.Truth is indeed far stranger than fiction.

One portrait describes Mohammed Al-Izmerly as an "acclaimed chemist and scholar" who "decided to turn his daughter Nuha's bedroom into a kind of family archive. The small room where he'd once kissed his daughter goodnight was now filled with pictures of Nuha and her sisters." The poster says the chemist was killed "while in custody at a camp near Baghdad International Airport."

The Associated Press reported in March that American investigators say Al-Izmerly was a leader of Iraq's effort to develop chemical arms and was an assassination specialist who designed a "poison pen."

It's not "he said she said", I hear that a lot lately, "you can't believe either side" or "you can't believe any news org" - now that the left has been so unmercifully discredited, everybody has to go down with the ship? Sorry, that kind of thinking (or lack of) is spineless and thoughtless.

Of course there are sources you can believe. Those that do their homework, get the facts, and write. Don't be lazy. Get your facts, do your homework and if you do, you will be richly rewarded with an uncommon gift.......knowledge.  There will be resources you will come to rely on, as they are historically accurate, a much needed but uncommon virtue in journalism. See above. This is  what they are teaching in your schools. And they won't let the poor have a choice, no school vouchers for the less fortunate, says the left. Even though Bush signed it into law early in his adminstration, no school vouchers for public or parochial schools. Home schooling is the future. Gotta be.

Photo NY Sun: VIGNETTES:  The  display  cases  in  CUNY’s  Graduate  Center  exhibit  portraits  of  Iraqi  civilians  killed  by  Americans.  RACHEL  PAPO

Comments

[V the K]

Interesting trickery on the part of the left. All of the terrorists killed in Iraq, the ones shooting at American troops and setting off roadside bombs... all of them are technically 'civilians' since they don't belong to an organized military operating under the flag of a recognized state.

[Craig]

"Portraits of Grief"? WTF?

Where are all the pictures of the dead Iraqis civilians- men, women, and children...killed by suicide bombers?

Tell you what Pamela, please take a picture of the grief stricken faces of the professors when I spit on them, bitchslap them, and kick them around like a soccer ball.

Those pictures will be better suited for Portraits of Grief.

[tommo]

You can't handle the truth!!

The inability to hold two thoughts at one time is typical of wingnuts.

Did you try this one a few weeks ago? Thanksgiving was first celebrated with native Americans. This country later performed genocide on many native Americans.

Anyone who holds up Ayn Rand as some kind of model would make themselves appear to be a shallow dilettante.

[visitor]

Do not show the dead! They never died! No Iraqis have been killed! It is sedition to believe otherwise!

[Joe Bob]

Yeah, especially the pictures of the kids. They are the worst terrorists of all. Let's get them first and then they won't be able to grow up to breed new ones.

[ruudgrl]

Pamela, Pamela - or should I say Atlas, Atlas? Methinks doth protest too much.

As a first time visitor to your site I scrolled down from your opening post "Islamic Jihad Deadly Homicide Bombing In Israel" followed by some trully horrific pictures of the victims of a terrorist bombing strewn across an Israeli street.

My question on this post "CUNY UNIVERSITY Exhibits Portraits of Iraqis Killed by American Troops" should be obvious. Isn't it just a tad hypocritical of you to post the pictures of dead Israelis, as a support of your position, while decrying the pictures of dead Iraqi's at CUNY as being somehow "un-American", to support their position?

Both you and CUNY are cupable in that you are willing to exhibit images of equally horrific and tragic events as political fodder to support a predetermined political viewpoint. In as much as you and CUNY have already made up your minds, on these issues, any further discussion becomes moot, as you both are simply twisting candy canes into pretzels to validate your particular and predertimined views.

To take the issue away from the myopic "I'm right, your wrong" political zebras I ask if there are actually people left in this country capable of having an intelligent analytical discourse? If so the larger question becomes: is either viewpoint, Pamela's or CUNY's, really wrong and worthy of derision?

Sucide bombers suck, civilians killed in a war sucks. A statement, a beginning, a common ground we can all hopefully agree on. Is Jack Murtha right? Partially. Is Bush right? Partially. While both can equally remain horribly wrong. So exactly what good can come of lining up behind either mistaken faction?

Liberals want to ignore the reality of the day to focus on the legitatamacy of the war. Neocons ignore the reality of the day to focus on the "rose colored" future they are creating. Both parties equally invested in polarizing the country further to hide there incompetence.

It has never been a "black and white" world. "Your with us or against us" is an insult to every free thinking American by putting an end to any reasonable discussion by playing the "patriotism card". As Samuel Johnson said "Patriotism is the last refuge of a scoundrel."

"The best defense against usurpatory government is an assertive citizenry." William F. Buckley

"Democracy is not something you believe in or a place to hang your hat, but it's something you do. You participate. If you stop doing it, democracy crumbles." Abbie Hoffman

If Bill and Abbie can agree then we must as well. The greatest threat I see to the future of this country is not the Islamic extremists, and all related threats, it is the inability of Americans to hold a civil, and intelligent, and open-minded discussion on pretty much, well, anything anymore.

"Conversation would be vastly improved by the constant use of four simple words: I do not know." Andre Maurois

The ad hominem attacks, the political posing and poliraziation must come to an end if we are to have any future successes in anything we do as a country.

OTS: As this is my first time at this site I gotta ask - What the hell is the fascination with the right and Ayn Rand? Have you ever heard what she thinks of conservatives? Obviously not. Ayn hated, pretty much, everyone that didn't adhere to her narrow and sociopathic non-philosophy of "objectivism". But she particularly hated the right for being nothing more then the tools of the religous whackjobs in this country. So I'm just amazed by the litanny of sites on the right that laud this woman as some sort of saint when she literally hated your guts. Hilarious. Oh BTW Ayn Rand writes as William Shatner acts.

[Fred]

Of course this is a disgusting leftist trick. Knowledge and information have always been some of the worst trickery from the left.
As for "All of the terrorists killed in Iraq, the ones shooting at American troops", technically the Iraqi people don't want them called terrorists because the Iraqi people approve of attacks on Americans. And the Iraqi people, at least those not actively helping the Iranians, will be shooting RPGs at us the day we leave. So much for appreciation from the liberated.

[Mark]

God forbid that Americans should ever come to have any notion of the murder and mayhem the U.S. military unleashes on the world.

[wxjames]

'God forbid that Americans should ever come to have any notion of the murder and mayhem the U.S. military unleashes on the world.'
Mark, you are a true shittead. You are either an anti-American leftist communist, or you are under the influence of an anti-American leftist communist but are far too stupid to realize what is happening around you. In either case, please drop dead.
Can the leftists be any less knowledgable than the Muslims who believe Allah has gramted them a seat in heaven for murder ?
Wake up, people; don't believe the bullshit you read or hear. Believe only the facts and draw conclusions from only the facts and you can free yourself from being twisted by a Muslim cleric or a communists.
Leading a good, clean life is a good thing. Being a friend and good neighbor is a good thing. Capitalism improves our standard of living, and that is a good thing. Hard work and financial discipline can help each of us achieve a better life, and that is a good thing. And, finally, defending your property and your family against Islamic radicals or revolutionary nitwits is a good thing.
What is all this need for victimhood ? Straighten up !

[Craig]

Ruudgrl,
Are you anencephalic?

If you are, let's help you out a wee bit: when you hear the term objectivism, think libertarian. And a libertarian is much closer to a conservative than the current definition of a social/liberal democrat. Is it a perfect 1 to 1? OF COURSE NOT...and for you to make that connection shows your ignorance.

Here are a few Rand quotes that exemplify conservative thinking:

"They proclaim that every man is entitled to exist without labor and, the laws of reality to the contrary notwithstanding, is entitled to receive his "minimum sustenance" his food, his clothes, his shelter, with no effort on his part, as his due and his birthright. To receive it, from whom?"

"Government "help" to business is just as disastrous as government persecution... the only way a government can be of service to national prosperity is by keeping its hands off."

"Run for your life from any man who tells you that money is evil. That sentence is the leper's bell of an approaching looter."

"The spread of evil is the symptom of a vacuum. whenever evil wins, it is only by default: by the moral failure of those who evade the fact that there can be no compromise on basic principles."

Next time, don't bring a knife to a gunfight.

[MarcH]

Thanks to Ruudgrl and his/her friends above for the textbook example of moral equivalency.

Ruudgrl can’t or won’t understand get how it is that Atlas would post photos of the Palestinian Islamic Jihad (PIJ) bombing of civilians as way to condemn terrorism but also decry the exhibition by CCNY students of photos of Iraqi civilians killed by U.S. forces during the campaign in Iraq.

The difference is that Atlas, in her various posts supplied, the context for the Netanya, Israel bombing photos. She has informed the reader that PIJ is part of a league of terrorist groups and governments who every day plan and act to kill or subjugate all moderate Muslims, homosexuals, Jews, Christians, atheists, Hindus, Buddhists, artists, etc. On the other hand, there is no indication that the CCNY students supplied any honest context with their photos.

I wonder whether the CCNY students included as a part of their exhibit a description and photos of Saddam’s torture chambers (closed by the U.S. military), Saddam’s terrorist training camps (closed by the U.S. military), and Saddam’s check book for payments to the families of “suicide” bombers (closed by the U.S. military). Did the CCNY students exhibit photos of the efforts of the U.S. military to build the democratic and economic infrastructure of Iraq (and the soldiers who have died trying to build these things)? I doubt it.

My point is that the Iraqi civilian casualties were the regrettable and unintended, but unavoidable by-products of a war to protect the whole world, including the people of Iraq, from monsters like Saddam and PIJ. The casualties of Netanya were the innocent victims of monsters.

We’ll need continued support for Operation Iraqi Freedom and other efforts if we are going to eliminate such monsters. Atlas’s blog is an example of support for such efforts. The CCNY exhibit and Ruudgrl’s comment were attempts to undermine support for such efforts.

[bhopper]

So lemmee get this straight... Y'all support this war because of Weapons of Mass Destruction - oops, I mean because of Sadam's links to Al Qaida - oops, I mean to "liberate people from torture" -- oops, it seems we torture too, don't we -- what exactly was the reason for this war again??

But anyway, you support this war, but then select to CENSOR what's really going on? hmmm.

Fact is tens of thousands of INNOCNET civillians (not "terrorists disguised as civilians - talk about Doublespeak) have been blown into itty-bitty bits by American bombs. Or perhaps just burned to the bone by white phosphorus?) But we shouldn't SEE any of that, huh? Just sweap it all under the rug??

If you had a choice of being "liberated" while having your wife and children blown up by American daisy cutters, or living under a SECULAR totalitarian regime, which would you choose?

Here's a revelation for you -- starting a war is a lot more than simply slapping a yellow magnet on the back of your SUV -- it's prolonged suffering or horrible deaths for many, many civillians.

"In war, the first casualty is truth"

That doesn't seem to bother you blind little sheep one bit, huh? How do you even look at yourselves in the mirror??

[Lars Gruber]

To the Chicken Hawk Cowards of the site,

How else will you ever see the killing there as you are too cowardly to join the war that you support so fervently.

Why? Because Republicans are cowardly by nature. They want sacrafrice from everyone, as long as it doesn't affect themselves.

If you had some courage, and join the war in Iraq, there would be no point in showing the photographs at all. But because you are a frightened child, the war is brought to you.

wxjames, you have a lot of nerve talking about knowledge since you are one of the people that can't tell brown people apart. Where's the outrage against those that actually attacked us, instead of lashing out against those who had nothing to do with 911? I know that Iraqis, Irunis and Saudis are mostly brown, but they are as different as Floridians, Quebecois and Mexicans.

Sorry for the big words, but there are online dictionaries to assist you.

I guess it was easier for you in the 80's when Saddam was Reagan's best friend and the recipient of oodles of weapons from a very simplistic Reagan and Rumsfeld.

Bottom Line, anyone who posts supporting the war in Iraq, yet does not participate in it, is a coward. So easy to hide behind your Dell, dude.

bok bok Chicken Hawk

[nikko]

My, my the trolls has come unhinged again. Is it not just a little uncomfortable criticising the overthrow of one of the "top ten mass murderes of all time"?

[Craig]

"Fact is tens of thousands of INNOCNET civillians (not "terrorists disguised as civilians - talk about Doublespeak)"

Are you disguised as someone who can spell and articulate?

[ruudgrl]

Craig ya just proved my point. With his ad hominum attack Craig shows his intellectual weakness by refusing to address any issue of substance. Craig would rather, sadly, slash and burn anything that doesn't conform to his extremely narrow point of view. These are the people we need to be terrified of not the Islamic fascists.

Craig - lighten up guy, you're gonna hurt yourself, have a xanax or 12, switch to decaf, some ovaltine perhaps. All I asked was what is up with the right and their deification of Ayn Rand. If you had ever taken the time to listen, actually listen to Ayn Rand, and not just regurgitate some juvenile, and obviously highly personal, interpretation of her sophomoric ramblings, you may not be so quick to put her on some sort of pedestal, libertarian or otherwise. The world is too big a place to waste any more of my time on you, you'll never get it, know go stare at the sun, again.

MarcH - I appreciate your attempt to at least be civil, that doesn't mean I agree. What I originally posted was a minor hypocrisy, of Pamela's, in lambasting CUNY for what she her self is culpable of. Namely, using timely "material" (photos or otherwise) to reach a conclusion she had already come to.

You yourself prove my point in your own thread - you write, "On the other hand, there is no indication..." exactly, there is no indication that Pamela, you, or I have attended the CCNY display but Pamela immediately assumes ill intent on behalf of the faculty and students.

How do we know that there isn't a "context", as you so desperately plead for, detailing each and every exhibit? We don't, but in an effort to twist her "liberal" bashing into a pretzel it does Pamela, in her myopic polarizing, no good to assume otherwise.

You are most gallant in your unsolicited defense of Pamela/Atlas, Marc, and you can go on for hours how Pamela did this, and did that, and CCNY didn't, the fact remains - you do not know. I stand by my interpretation of Pamela's bias and refer you to a quote in my previous thread from Andre Maurois - "Conversation would be vastly improved by the constant use of four simple words: I do not know."

How does any society fall? Rarely from without, and almost always from within. That was my overlooked point - it is not the terrorists (of whatever faction), it is not Islam, it is not the Arabs, it is not the Persians (and if ya don't know the difference between Persians and Arabs just STFU about anything to do with the Middle East), that we need to fear.

There will always be a threat on the horizon, and that threat will never amount to much, in histoical context, unless we make it so. America is the most succesfull democracy in the history of civilization. America is an idea that exists in the hearts and minds of everyone that understands and fights for that ideal. The only serious threat to America is, and can only ever be, America itself.

If we allow discourse to break down to such hostility, "my way or the highway", "I'm right you're an a**hole", to paraphrase a former professor - Intelligent people discuss ideas, mediocre minds argue the events of the day, idiots talk about themselves. America needs some new ideas, get it? Talk amongst yourselves.

[seeteeare]

Well, you see Lars, on this site the first concern is the State of Israel. If an Israeli gets his ass blown to bits it's plain and simple terrorism. If an Iraqi gets his time in the ground meat making machine that's bringing liberty and democracy to Iraq and if the Iraqi hadn't been a terrorist he wouldn't have been made a wet red cloud to begin with.

If Israel has a nuclear weapon that's OK. If Iran has one that's bad. Because you see, Israel, being the great benefactor of the Middle East, a paragon of virtue, democracy, level-headed thinking, without territorial ambitions and devoid of malicious intent towards any state in the Middle East would never use it. It's only the Iranians, those evil, cowardly Islamoterrorists that can't be trusted to act in the best interests of Israel and therefore must be bombed into smithereens if they attempt to obtain nuclear weapons.

On this site, it's Israel first, Israel second, Israel third and if, by chance, there is a conincidence of interests, then the USA. This is the most blatently pro-Israeli, to hell with America, blog on the web. These people are actually nuts.

Now, in closing, let me say that I don't believe Iran can be trusted with nuclear weapons. But without the oversight and leverage of the US with Israel, I wouldn't trust them either.

So to hell with the 2 of them I say. Oh, and by the way, Iran has never purposefully sought to sink a US Navy vessel operating in international waters, killing 32 and wounding 164. Purposefully and with evil intent, Israel did.

seeteeare

[John Gillnitz]

Showing pictures of dead civilians is worse then making more dead civilians. Got it. I'll make Ms. Shrugs a deal: If my tax dollars will stop being used to kill people her tax dollars won't be used to show pictures of the people that were killed.

[Craig]

Ruudgrl,
"All I asked was what is up with the right and their deification of Ayn Rand. If you had ever taken the time to listen, actually listen to Ayn Rand, and not just regurgitate some juvenile, and obviously highly personal, interpretation of her sophomoric ramblings, you may not be so quick to put her on some sort of pedestal, libertarian or otherwise. The world is too big a place to waste any more of my time on you, you'll never get it, know go stare at the sun, again."

Do you have A.D.D?
Are you having trouble "interpreting" the Rand quotes? If so, suggest Remedial Reading 100.

[MarcH]

Ruudgrl (in a comment above) asks, “How do we know that there isn't a "context", as you so desperately plead for, detailing each and every exhibit (in reference to the CCNY exibit) We don't, but in an effort to twist her "liberal" bashing into a pretzel it does Pamela, in her myopic polarizing, no good to assume otherwise. "

We know Ruudgrl, because the NY Sun article (by a reporter who apparently attended the event) discussed that issue and Atlas included it in her post: “None of the vignettes contain information about the context of the specific American military actions and none mentions the existence of Iraqi and foreign insurgents. The students in Mr. Batchen's class wrote the biographical snippets using information they culled from anti-war Web sites, iraqvictims.com, iraqbodycount.org, and the Web site of the Guardian newspaper”.

[wxjames]

Lars. you dumb ass, I don't care which color brown they are. Any Muslim who believes it's his duty to kill the rest of us should be eliminated post haste. The world would be better with fewer lunatics; Iranians, Arabs, Sikhs, Neandertals, whatever.

[Railroad Stone]

I'd like to correct one of you raving loony lefites: "tommo"

"The inability to hold two thoughts at one time is typical of wingnuts."

Actually, it's their ability to hold two contradictory thoughts at once which defines them. They're reluctance to see the contradiction is what you're describing.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doublethink.

[Railroad Stone]

wxjames, is the world better with you in it?

Can you cite any particular reason why it wouldn't be better without you?

[Mike]

Worst comment thread ever!

[susan]

Look at what happens when the brain is high on NY Times; all the slime rots the mind. Suppose the anti-humanitarians would rather support Saddam's underground children's prisons than to ever admit that they are useful idiots for the NY Times. In a word: PROVINCIALISM (as in narrow-minded myoptic little pea-brained idiot savant provincialism)

Man, this is too easy to bitch-slap the anti-humanitarian useful idiots!

[WarIsFun]

So whats new. American terrorists blowing up innocents and people who want a Iraq free of Americans.

WTF is wrong with people who can only see this as left or right issue. One can only hope that these Iraqis somehow get hold of the people who support this war and blow them with their families out of extinction. After all, US did the same to Afghanis.

Oh yeah, God Bless America. Spit.

[blue5ridge]

joebob, their is a vast difference between this site using pictures of dead Israelis and a TAXPAYER FUNDED college using pictures of dead Iraqi civilians, whatever one's view is. Atlas Shrugs is a website funded only by the owner and those who CHOOSE to support it, (with every opportunity to state one's position, I might add). CUNY, on the other hand, is supported by TAXPAYERS who have NO SAY whatsoever in its continued funding, other than donors. And the unasked question, here, is that if it is a class project, what are the ramifications, if any, for students who disagree with how the project is done.

[blue5ridge]

seeteeare says: I'll make Ms. Shrugs a deal: If my tax dollars will stop being used to kill people her tax dollars won't be used to show pictures of the people that were killed.

first, I'd have to ask how you will manage to keep your part of the 'deal'. you can't. two options exist for seeing how your personal tax dollars are spent; neither are really in your favor. you can refuse to pay taxes or you can vote for someone who will distribute them in a way you agree with. (personally, I'd rather not have mine spent on generational welfare, farm subsidies, bridges to nowhere, or rebuilding in areas that will, eventually, have to be rebuilt yet again, or any other socialized spending). realize, of course, that with our form of government, not everyone is going to get everything they want and it would seem that in 2002 and 2004 more people disagreed with you than agreed. you have the opportunity to convince enough people to agree with in 2006 and 2008, but I don't think your 'deal' is going to do it.

[cam505]

I am curious...three years and a drained treasury later, how many of you still stand by the views you expressed in the above blog?

Also, given that this website is a forum which advertises itself as a bastion of our country's constitutional freedom of political speech, it seems odd to me that so many commentators passionately advocate censoring such an expression in a college setting.

Indeed, it is not easy to listen to views with which you do not agree. But we all must defend each others' rights to express such views, or else this freedom could vanish.